Talk:John F. Kennedy International Airport

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search
See also: Talk:John F. Kennedy International Airport/Archive


This airport article provides a ton of information and cover probably (next to) everything most people using the airport will need. However, there is not a single eat or sleep listing, so it has to be an outline. Seems easy enough to rectify, right? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


It effectively gets 2 listings, and normally, booking or price-comparison services are not included on this site at all, per external links#what not to link to. What do you all think? I've never heard of them. Are they important enough that we should make an exception for them? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Making connections[edit]

Request someone who knows explain the basic challenges for making flight connections between different terminals. The cautions expressed in "Understand" deserve some description of why such times are essential, e.g., for security lines (induced by air side/ground side/air side transfer complications), Customs and Immigration lines, walking distances (supported or not by moving walkways), and whether certain times are best avoided if possible. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 18:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

How early to arrive[edit]

Re: This edit: What is "several hours"? I try to arrive around 2 hours before domestic flights, and if I arrive 1.5 hours before, it's enough time and usually not close to actually being a problem, even though I always refuse to go through the diffusion scanner and sometimes have to wait up to 20 minutes for someone to pat me down. It's recommended to arrive earlier for international flights.

However, not knowing which terminal to go to is not a good reason to arrive early. Instead, you should simply go to on your cellphone (the same site linked at the beginning of the article) and input the name of your airline into the search bar, and then you will see what terminal to go to. The AirTrain also has a directory of airlines for each terminal where it stops. If you take (or, IMO, make the mistake of taking) any kind of shuttle bus or supershuttle, the driver will also tell you what terminal to go to. Taxi drivers normally know where to let you off, too, though it sure wouldn't hurt for you to double-check before leaving or even en route. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I was just copying the information from the New York City article. Thank you for improving it. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:09, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Glad to help. I literally will check the terminal on my cellphone while on the A train to the airport, though I usually also get a text from the airline with that info while I'm on my way to the airport. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
International flight early arrival for well managed airports like jfk: hwever up to 3 hours before for places like Delhi and Denpasar for examples - due to massive crowds and inadequate staffing for the various stages of departing JarrahTree (talk) 00:38, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Dynamic map[edit]

I'm sorry, but I can't see how this map is useful, and I intended to revert the addition of it once already (it looks like I removed mapshape, not mapframe, though). My edit summary specified why:

"Pardon me, but this really is less useful than the static map. It has no labels." (OK, now I see two roads are labeled, but so what? The terminals are not, the Air Train is not shown, etc.)

Really, I can't see any good reason to put dynamic maps willy-nilly into every article, no matter how useless or unnecessary they are in certain cases. Please defend the superior utility of this dynamic map before I delete it entirely. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Slow down a minute. The terminals are labeled: just click on them like you do with a marker on any other dynamic map. And the AirTrain was shown, until you removed it in your mistaken edit; I've restored it just now. So the dynamic map isn't as useless as you make it sound.
The dynamic map may not be labeled quite as well as the static map, but I wouldn't say it's redundant or useless. It shows colors that match the "districts" for each terminal, which the static map doesn't. It lets readers zoom and pan so they can see finer details or see how the airport is situated relative to the rest of the city and the subway system. And it will update itself if we add markers and listings in the rest of the text, such as markers to point out the stations on the AirTrain or nearby subway stops or the rental car center, or even locations inside the airport terminals.
I don't agree that having two different maps is a problem in and of itself. Dynamic maps are not a perfect replacement yet for static maps, but I don't think that means we shouldn't start using them. Among other benefits, doing so will help us find the weaknesses with dynamic maps that need to be improved. And complaining that a map is incomplete is not a helpful complaint on a wiki: surely the solution is to improve the map or the listings that are building it, not to remove the map. --Bigpeteb (talk) 21:22, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
But there is a preexisting map that is better and could also be improved. I really don't see the point. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:40, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
No, we're not going to relitigate the "what's wrong with having two identical maps" question. That's already been settled. The dynamic map is redundant and should be deleted. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I guess I missed or couldn't find where the question of having both types of map on one page was settled previously. Could you link me to the relevant policy and/or disccussion(s) so I can catch up?
Nevertheless, if only one map is allowed, why should the default answer be "remove the dynamic map"? What if we instead leave the dynamic map up for a few days (so editors can see the results of their changes), work on adding markers and geocoding listings, and then remove the static map once the dynamic map shows as much or more information? --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
If anything should be added to the static map, perhaps we could ask User:Shaundd to do it. But the reason, really, is that the static map is clear and complete and it's pretty simple to cover an airport, which isn't likely to change drastically for some time to come. Don't you agree that there are more important tasks than reinventing the wheel? Certainly, there are articles with no maps or static maps that are much further from exemplary than on this page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ikan, I'm of two minds on this. On one hand I'd like to help out, but on the other, my feeling is static maps have nearly zero support in the community so I'm not sure it's worth the time to fix one up if someone is going to complain about it being a static map and put up a dynamic map anyway. If there is a consensus the static map should be kept and there's agreement on what needs to be changed, let me know and I'll be happy to help out. -Shaundd (talk) 06:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Completely understood. User:Bigpeteb, can you enumerate anything that's currently lacking or outdated about this static map? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Hmm... I suppose not. The static map is a little large for my liking, so it's hard to read without enlarging it, but that's a minor complaint. Aside from that, I suppose it's fairly complete. This airport article redirects to nearby districts for hotels, so there aren't any markers to add for hotels, nearby restaurants, etc.
Alright, I concede. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The static map is good enough. Away with the dynamic map. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks for addressing this in good faith. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Ikan Kekek, Bigpeteb, I agree the map is a bit hard to read without enlarging, even on a desktop, and it was one of the things I thought needed to change when I first looked the map. I think readability is important so I can go in an adjust the font and font sizes -- does that sound good? -Shaundd (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I'll have to take that back. The image is PNG only, there's no SVG to edit. I can ask PerryPlanet if he has an SVG version of the map. -Shaundd (talk) 16:55, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
That would be awesome if it's possible. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)